I'm confused by your position here. You started selling prints on eBay for $50 and over time, you rose your price. Now you're saying that people who sell prints at those same prices are doing everyone else a disservice for selling them too cheaply (by the way, the correct spelling is "cheap" - "cheep" is what baby birds do.) This seems like a double standard. Why was it OK for you to build a market for your work over time by starting with lower prices, but a bad idea for the other folks who have elected to do the same? At the end of the day, eBay is the ultimate free market system. We can praddle all day long about what we think our work is worth - how much it cost to make it, what is "fair", etc... But at the end of the day, you're selling a product and it's only worth what people are willing to pay for it. This is why (generally speaking) original prints from well-known photographers that pop-up on eBay from time to time sell for market prices (Brett Weston, Caponigro, etc...) However, it wasn't always that way for these guys. At some point, they had to build a reputation and audience for their work just like everybody else and most of them took decades to reach that point (a lifetime in some cases). As such, it seems perfectly acceptable to me for unknown photographers to offer prints on eBay at a lower price to build an audience. In this day and age, people have shorter attention spans than ever and many young photographers that I meet expect to bypass the long hard road it takes to build a name for themselves. With a few exceptions, careers are built over the long haul - even if the work is "good".